The one and only free public forum for Bohras. The focus of this forum is the reform movement, the Dawoodi Bohra faith and, of course, the corrupt priesthood. But the discussion is in no way restricted to the Bohras alone.

The Fatimid dynasty first established itself in Tunisia, North Africa, in December 303 A.H. / 909 A.D. In order to expand their realm and to make it more effective, the Fatimids needed a capital more central than Tunisia. Egypt – a convenient centre for Syria, Palestine, Arabia and the Mediterranean Islands – presented excellent possibilities. Thus, the Fatimids conquered Egypt and built the city of al-Qahirah (Cairo) to be their new capital. The conquest of Egypt was the first series of conquests which extended Fatimid rule from Sicily to Sind.
The Fatimids are the direct descendents of Prophet Muhammed (Peace be upon Him) through his daughter, Fatima, and his cousin, Ali. To understand the importance of this claim it is necessary to recall the early days of Islam and the controversy that rose over the Prophet’s succession. After the Prophet’s death (632 A.D.) the Muslims peoples split into two major parties: the Shia and the Sunni, because the Sunni believed that the Prophet did not have a successor. Hence they elected Abu Bakr to be the first Caliph of Islam. The Shia, however, did not accept this theory because they firmly held that the Prophet chose Ali to succeed him both as the religious leader (Imam) and the temporal head (Caliph). The Shia upheld the claim of Ali’s lineal descendents to the Caliphate and waited for the time when the Caliphate would be restored to the rightful holders. The establishment of the Fatimid State fulfilled this wish which had been zealously supported by Ismaili Shiites all over the Islamic lands.

The coming of the Fatimids marked a new era in the history of Islam because they posed serious intellectual and political challenges to the existing order.

(The Fatimids) …. were moved by more than personal or dynastic ambition. They were the heralders of a new intellectual and religious philosophy which aimed at nothing less than the transformation and renewal of all Islam and the establishment of the universal Ismaili Imamat. As Ismaili Shiites, they refused to offer even token submission to the Abassid caliphs, the usurpers; they and they alone were the true Imams, by descent and by God’s choice, the sole rightful heads of the Islamic community. The Caliphate was theirs by right, and they would take from the Abbasids as the Abbasids had taken it from the Ummayads. (1)
The Fatimid state sprung into existence and rapidly expanded into an empire as a result of the widespread Ismaili propaganda carried on by the Dawat (missionary movement). The Dawat, during the Fatimid period, was organized into a branch of government with its own functions, structure, and hierarchy, under the directions of the chief missionary and the ultimate authority of the Caliph in his capacity as Imam. The Dawat was responsible for formulating Ismaili theology and for carrying out missionary work amongst the public, and for gaining the adherence to the Fatimid cause of as many local rulers as possible.

“Thus the Fatimids gave their distinctive doctrines a central importance in their political system. Ismaili theology provided the basis to the caliphate and denied that of the Abbasids. As long as the Abbasids survived, the Fatimids were engaged in a religious and ideological conflict, in which doctrine was their most powerful weapon. Thus the Fatimids accorded prime importance to the formulation and elaboration of their creed. First in North Africa and then in Egypt, a series of distinguished theologians wrote what became the classical works of Ismaili literature. Most of the authors had served in the Mission and some like Hamid al-Din as-Kirmani and al-Muayyad fi’l-Din al-Shirazi had been its chiefs.” (2)

It was not enough merely to formulate an ideology, for there was also the more practical business of disseminating it. For this purpose, the Dawat sent highly educated and trained missionaries to other areas. In Cairo, the Fatimids founded great libraries and colleges where Da’is were trained to go out into the field, and to give further instruction to new converts. The best known of these colleges were the Darul Hikmah and the Al-Azhar. When Nasir Khusraw visited Al-Azhar in 1047 A.D., he found 317 professors and as many as 9758 students engaged in the study o logic, mathematics, law, physics, astronomy and theology. The Al-Azhar contained 200,000 manuscripts among which were such treasures as 2400 illuminated copies of the Holy Qu’ran; manuscripts in the handwriting of Ibn Muglah and other master calligraphers, and an autographed copy of the history written by the famous historian Al-Tabbari. Access to these library treasures was free to all. A large, fund, established by the Caliph al-Hakim was spent on books, scholarships and on the upkeep of the colleges. Al-Azhar retained the stature of one of the great educational institutions of the Islamic world and still exists as a flourishing university in Cairo (3)

Many eager converts came to Cairo from Sunni lands in the East to study at these colleges and then returned to their own countries as exponents of the Ismaili message and workers for the Fatimid cause. One such person was the Persian poet and philosopher, Nasir-i-Khusraw. A convert to Ismailism, he went to Egypt in 1047 A.D. and returned to preach the faith in Iran and Central Asia, where he won a considerable following. Hassan-bin-Sabbah, converted by a Fatimid agent in Iran, also went to Egypt in 1078 A.D. and stayed there for about three years.

The Ismaili message had considerable appeal to many different elements in the population. It was a time of great social, economic, political and intellectual upheaval in the Islamic world. As in late Ummayad times there were many who felt that the Islamic community had gone astray and that a new leader, with new messages, was needed to restore the community to the right path. There was withdrawal of consent form the existing order, a loss of confidence in hitherto accepted answers. The Abbasid Caliphate, and with it the Sunni order, began to weaken; some new principle of unity and authority was required to save Islam and the Muslims from destruction. To many, the Ismaili principles offered a design for a new and just world order, under the Imam. To the devout, the doubtful and the discontented alike, the Ismaili missionaries brought messages of comfort and hope, appropriate to the needs of each. For the pious, they brought a deep spiritual faith, sustained by the example of the suffering of the Imams and the self-sacrifice of their followers. For the intellectual, they brought a comprehensive explanation of the universe, synthesizing the data of revelation and philosophy, science and mysticism. For the rebellious, there was a well organized and wide-spread movement, supported by a rich and powerful ruler far away, and offering a seductive prospect of radical change. (4)

Through the Dawat system, Sind was made a principality of the Fatimid Empire (5). They enjoyed similar success in Yemen. Because the Fatimids were one of the most formidable naval powers of their time, they controlled both the Red Sea and the eastern Mediterranean seaways (6). They profitably used their navy to expand their empire; thus Fatimid power was respected from Sicily, which owned Fatimid overlordship, to Sind where an Ismaili Dai was established. The navy also served to protect this vast coastline and the major sea routes. The protection afforded by the navy greatly encouraged sea commerce and Cairo quickly became a major transhipment point between the Mediterranean and the southern seas. The Egyptians reaped a great wealth from the sea commerce so that the capital of the Fatimids continued to prosper. Fatimid commercial activities were often accompanied by vigorous religious propaganda. This was the case on the Gujerati coast where propaganda gave rise to what in time became the great Ismaili community of India.

Fatimid supremacy on the seas was possible due to their knowledge of astronomy and geography. The Fatimid Caliphs were great patrons of science and learning, thus encouraging research in astronomy and geography. There were big observatories in Cairo where scholars could follow the movement of the stars. Ibn Yunus, who worked in these observatories, is considered one of the greatest astronomers of the Islamic World. An astrolabe (instrument for measuring altitude of the sun and stars at sea) developed in the time of Imam Moiz is still kept in the British Museum in London. Geography formed an important part of the curriculum at the Al-Azhar. The Caliph Moiz was greatly interested in geography and commended a piece of silk to be made at Tustar in Persia, representing, in gold and colours, a map of the world, which cost him 22,000 Dinars (7).

The peak of the Fatimid expansion came in the years 1057-9 when the Turkish general al-Basasiri went over to the Fatimid side and proclaimed the Fatimid Caliphate in Baghdad, the home of the orthodox caliphate.

“. . . . for forty Fridays the mosques of Baghdad resounded with the name and style of the Egyptian Caliph and the robe and filigree throne of the Abbasid Caliph were actually carried off and deposited in the palace of Cairo.” (8)

Despite the efforts of the Chief Da’i, however, the Fatimid government was unable to provide effective support and the strong Sunni Seljuks drove al-Basasiri out of Baghdad. From this point on the Fatimid Empire began to decline at a rapid pace.

A number of reasons can be given to account for the decline of the Fatimid Empire. With the revival of Christian power, the Fatimids had to face Byzantine offensives whereby they lost much of Sicily and Spain and had to cope with the wave of Crusades from the east. This did much to weaken the Empire.

But the Christians were not the only power threatening Fatimid sovereignty. A far greater power, that of the Seljuk Turkamans, was emerging from the east.

“The Seljuks had subdued Persia, and in 1055 their leader, Tughril-Beg, was recognized in Baghdad in the Friday prayers as the Caliph, lieutenant, or in other words, master” (9). The Turks, who were the new great power in Islam, became the protectors of orthodoxy and Sunnism, and the Sunni revival, fostered by them, became the new moral force in Islam. The orthodox Turks, zealous for the faith, considered it their sacred duty to extirpate the Egyptian rulers. Conquest of Syria as a first step was a very difficult task as it was already a divided and rebellious state. The Turkish general Astiz conquered it in 1076 A.D., and further reduced the dwindling Fatimid Empire.

The containment of the Fatimid danger was not achieved by military and political means alone, though these were essential and in a large measure successful.

In the madrasa (religious college) Sunni Islam created a new and crucial weapon in the struggle for religious unity. In these great colleges, spreading all over the East, the scholars and theologians of the Sunna devised and taught the orthodox answer to the Ismaili intellectual challenge. (10)

But the worst problems of all were at home in Egypt. Factional strife between the Sudani and Turkish battalions of the army caused chaos in the country. The Turkish troops, taking advantage of the situation, despoiled the palace, emptied the treasury and destroyed the library. Economic upheavals culminated in a series of disastrous famines, which, according to the chroniclers, reduced the people to a minimum standard of living. Finally in 1073, according to the summons of Imam Mustansirbillah, an able soldier, Badr al-Jamali, established a regime which restored order and some measure of prosperity in Egypt. Jamali was succeeded by his son, al-Afdal.

The Caliph Mustansirbillah died in 1094 after naming his eldest son Nizar, as His successor. But the wazir al-Afdal hastily set the youngest of the late caliph's seven sons on the throne with the title of al-Mustali. He thought a youth of eighteen more amenable to management than a mature man. Most of the non-Egyptian Ismailis, especially those in Iran, did not accept this substitute and rejected the leadership of the remaining Fatimid Caliphs and became the Nizari Ismailis. On the death of the last strong Fatimid Caliph, Al-Amir (1101-1130), the Ismailis of Arabia and the Indian Ocean coasts rejected them, also becoming the Tayibis, now represented chiefly by the Indian merchant community of the Bohraas. The divergence between the Ismaili religion and state was now complete. The Fatimid Empire had been established to fulfill a religious ideal and had been sustained by the religious zeal of its supporters. Thus, without the support of its religious following, the empire collapsed. Al-Afdal had, in effect, renounced the claims of the Fatimid Caliphate to the universal leadership of Islam. The petty remnants of the Fatimid state were brought to a final end by the Sunni Saladin in 1171 A.D.

... why the Imamat did not switch to Imam Ali AS eldest son after Karbala ?

Why should it have? Are you suggesting that if an Imam passes away his brother should automatically succeed? You realize that Imam Hassan passed away before Imam Hussain, right? In any case, according the Fatemi-Tayebi theology, imammat can only reside in the descendants of M. Ali and M. Fatema, and that after Hassan and Hussain it only goes from father to son.

The descendents of Imam Hassan are calledAlids primarily Sunnis.
There is not much information on the son of Hassan but his grandson Hasan ibn Zayd was the governor of madina during the reign of the 2nd Abbasid, Al Mansur

The descendents of Imam Hussein are called Fatimids The first Fatimid caliphate is Zainul abedin, primarily Shia.

Abbasids caliphate originates from Abbas the son of abd-al-muttalib, and uncle of the prophet, primarily Sunno

The Umayyad, caliphate,’originates from Umayya, the brother of abd-al muttalib (grandfather of the prophet) Muawiyah claims the caliphate from Hassan, but it collapses with Muawiyah 2, son of Yazid, who unlike his father and grandfather was a good person and dies without any heir. The reigns are taken up by Marwan a companion of the prophet and his successors continues the Umayyad dynasty, until overthrown by the Abbasids, primarily Sunni

After Imam Hassan was poisoned by Muawiyah,
The people of Kufa called upon hussein for help from the tyranny of Muawiyah. Hussain was certainly a better candidate and predestined to be the next imam.

Now the time has come for revival of this great dynasty .
The current Fatimid Dai is great patrons of science and learning.
Aljamea-tus-Saifiyah Surat and Karachi are equivalent to Hikmah and the Al-Azhar.

Now the time has come for revival of this great dynasty .
The current Fatimid Dai is great patrons of science and learning.
Aljamea-tus-Saifiyah Surat and Karachi are equivalent to Hikmah and the Al-Azhar.

The cut-paste job that "Ateka" has done (see the original source at http://www.ismaili.net/Source/1359b.html itself based on Bernard Lewis's and other's works) is basically based on the Nizari perspective of Fatimid history. Even the other so-called "book" posted by Pandora786 is just a cut-paste job from websites and other books. (Not Pandora786's fault so not blaming him). These are serious examples of plagiarism. Please at least acknowledge the source from where you cut-paste. Don't pass off things written by others as your own. But never mind for now.

To say that "But the wazir al-Afdal hastily set the youngest of the late caliph's seven sons on the throne with the title of al-Mustali. He thought a youth of eighteen more amenable to management than a mature man" is to clearly display a blatant bias towards the Nizaris. Obviously this is rejected by the Tayyebis and we consider Imam Mustali to be the true successor of Imam Mustansir. After the seclusion of Imam Tayyeb we do not recognize any of the leaders of the remnants of the Fatmid empire as legitimate. Hence, the breaking away of the dawaat from the empire and the establishment of the chain of dua't al-mutlaqeen by M. Hurrat al-Maleka.

To really study Bohra history one must actually study it from texts written by Bohras. There are several such books but they are either in Arabic or very complex Gujrathi written in Arabic script (dawaat-ni-zaban). So it is not easy. Of course there are other resources too but one must detect biases to get a clear picture from our perspective.

In any case "Babu Shia"'s statement "The current Fatimid Dai is great patrons of science and learning" made me fall off LOL-ing. I mean, please be real. The current usurper Muffy, a fake-da'i, is an ignorant anti-intellectual buffoon. Jamia graduates are taliban like fanatics. They are anti-science. No original work happens in Jamia, only repeating things from the past and of course praising the da'i to seventh heavens. They know nothing about modern science and in fact are stuck about 1000 years into the past. To compare them to the ancient centers of learning is absurd in the extreme. But anyway, I guess it is good to be stuck in a intellectual stupor induced from too much plate licking, chest thumping and more-la more-la shouting ...

Shame! on you Biradar for hijaking my post to vent your anger.
Yes my very first post was indeed cut and paste (many don’t bother with links), but with a good intention. Wanted to share a bit of history, not show off! Will remember to leave the source next time.
Lastly, you are more then welcome to share any information but if only adds to the readers knowledge. Going in circles, and maligning will not help or change people’s perception.
If you want change, use a proactive and positive approach.
Stop all the whinging and grow up!!

The cut-paste job that "Ateka" has done (see the original source at http://www.ismaili.net/Source/1359b.html itself based on Bernard Lewis's and other's works) is basically based on the Nizari perspective of Fatimid history. Even the other so-called "book" posted by Pandora786 is just a cut-paste job from websites and other books. (Not Pandora786's fault so not blaming him). These are serious examples of plagiarism. Please at least acknowledge the source from where you cut-paste. Don't pass off things written by others as your own. But never mind for now.

To say that "But the wazir al-Afdal hastily set the youngest of the late caliph's seven sons on the throne with the title of al-Mustali. He thought a youth of eighteen more amenable to management than a mature man" is to clearly display a blatant bias towards the Nizaris. Obviously this is rejected by the Tayyebis and we consider Imam Mustali to be the true successor of Imam Mustansir. After the seclusion of Imam Tayyeb we do not recognize any of the leaders of the remnants of the Fatmid empire as legitimate. Hence, the breaking away of the dawaat from the empire and the establishment of the chain of dua't al-mutlaqeen by M. Hurrat al-Maleka.

To really study Bohra history one must actually study it from texts written by Bohras. There are several such books but they are either in Arabic or very complex Gujrathi written in Arabic script (dawaat-ni-zaban). So it is not easy. Of course there are other resources too but one must detect biases to get a clear picture from our perspective.

In any case "Babu Shia"'s statement "The current Fatimid Dai is great patrons of science and learning" made me fall off LOL-ing. I mean, please be real. The current usurper Muffy, a fake-da'i, is an ignorant anti-intellectual buffoon. Jamia graduates are taliban like fanatics. They are anti-science. No original work happens in Jamia, only repeating things from the past and of course praising the da'i to seventh heavens. They know nothing about modern science and in fact are stuck about 1000 years into the past. To compare them to the ancient centers of learning is absurd in the extreme. But anyway, I guess it is good to be stuck in a intellectual stupor induced from too much plate licking, chest thumping and more-la more-la shouting ...

Shame! on you Biradar for hijaking my post to vent your anger.
Yes my very first post was indeed cut and paste (many don’t bother with links), but with a good intention. Wanted to share a bit of history, not show off! Will remember to leave the source next time.
Lastly, you are more then welcome to share any information but if only adds to the readers knowledge ....

Anger? What are you talking about? Did you read anything I actually wrote about the inaccuracies in your original post? Or got so angry for getting caught that you missed the whole point?

All I did was point out that you plagiarized, that is cut-paste without mentioning source. Intentions are good but please make sure you give source so we know where you got stuff from.

More importantly, my point was not your plagiarism. But simply that what you posted was biased towards the Nizari viewpoint and hence not accurate, at least as far as Bohras are concerned. See, if you had provided the original link it would have been immediately obvious that you copied things from a Nizari-Ismaili website and so one would know the biases immediately. Instead, by passing things off as your own you misled people into thinking that the nass on Imam Mustali was not genuine and it was the nefarious scheming of al-Afdal to "steal" it from Nizar. Obviously, this is not true. According to the Tayebi bohras, Imam Mustansir appointed Imam Mustali as his successor. Nizar made a claim which we reject.

Now, about me "sharing information". I have made a huge number of posts. More than 1500 if I count posts I made under a different ID I unfortunately forgot the password to. Not one of them is a cut-paste from any website. And, I have written reams and reams of stuff on history, philosophy and had very lively debates here. So please spare me the lecture about "sharing information".

I understand you are upset but that was not my intention. I wanted to point out inaccuracies in your cut-paste text. That is all.

Incidentally, one can learn a lot from Nizari sources too. Certainly I have. However, as I pointed out before one needs to be cautious to detect biases and make sure one understands the differences in how history is interpreted. The Bohra view of history and philosophy differs very significantly from the Nizari views. Part of the issue is that the Bohras remained faithful to the older Fatmid and pre-Fatimid theology, while, due to the events at Alamut with the declaration of qiyama the Nizaris diverged significantly.

Anyhow, don't be upset. If you want to "share information" that you did not write yourself, why not just leave the link? Why cut-paste? Thats all.

you are right. Apologies! This book that I have attached in this thread was sent to me by some die hard abde cousin and very into muffy moula moula and she said this is the truth!
I beg to differ and and even had a tiff as I have read other books that some Fatemi Imams were tyrants as per this book I have attached.

The cut-paste job that "Ateka" has done (see the original source at http://www.ismaili.net/Source/1359b.html itself based on Bernard Lewis's and other's works) is basically based on the Nizari perspective of Fatimid history. Even the other so-called "book" posted by Pandora786 is just a cut-paste job from websites and other books. (Not Pandora786's fault so not blaming him). These are serious examples of plagiarism. Please at least acknowledge the source from where you cut-paste. Don't pass off things written by others as your own. But never mind for now.

To say that "But the wazir al-Afdal hastily set the youngest of the late caliph's seven sons on the throne with the title of al-Mustali. He thought a youth of eighteen more amenable to management than a mature man" is to clearly display a blatant bias towards the Nizaris. Obviously this is rejected by the Tayyebis and we consider Imam Mustali to be the true successor of Imam Mustansir. After the seclusion of Imam Tayyeb we do not recognize any of the leaders of the remnants of the Fatmid empire as legitimate. Hence, the breaking away of the dawaat from the empire and the establishment of the chain of dua't al-mutlaqeen by M. Hurrat al-Maleka.

To really study Bohra history one must actually study it from texts written by Bohras. There are several such books but they are either in Arabic or very complex Gujrathi written in Arabic script (dawaat-ni-zaban). So it is not easy. Of course there are other resources too but one must detect biases to get a clear picture from our perspective.

In any case "Babu Shia"'s statement "The current Fatimid Dai is great patrons of science and learning" made me fall off LOL-ing. I mean, please be real. The current usurper Muffy, a fake-da'i, is an ignorant anti-intellectual buffoon. Jamia graduates are taliban like fanatics. They are anti-science. No original work happens in Jamia, only repeating things from the past and of course praising the da'i to seventh heavens. They know nothing about modern science and in fact are stuck about 1000 years into the past. To compare them to the ancient centers of learning is absurd in the extreme. But anyway, I guess it is good to be stuck in a intellectual stupor induced from too much plate licking, chest thumping and more-la more-la shouting ...

Biradar bhai, Thanks a lot for your post. It was very interesting. I had a question and wonder if anyone is able to provide some thoughts.

There are two major schisms when we think about the Imams. One is with the twelver shias between Imam Ismail and Musa Kazim. Second, is with the Ismailis with Imam Mustali and Nizar. In the case of the first schism, we believe that older brother was chosen for imamate and in the second one a younger brother. I know that age is not necessarily a factor in Nuss and father can chose any of his sons. But, is there any precedence either way amongst all the other Imams and Nuss? ie is the oldest son usually the next Imam?

Biradar bhai, Thanks a lot for your post. It was very interesting. I had a question and wonder if anyone is able to provide some thoughts.

There are two major schisms when we think about the Imams. One is with the twelver shias between Imam Ismail and Musa Kazim. Second, is with the Ismailis with Imam Mustali and Nizar. In the case of the first schism, we believe that older brother was chosen for imamate and in the second one a younger brother. I know that age is not necessarily a factor in Nuss and father can chose any of his sons. But, is there any precedence either way amongst all the other Imams and Nuss? ie is the oldest son usually the next Imam?

Often, but not always the older son is the next Imam. However, this is not a rule and the Imam is free to chose any of his sons as the next Imam. I should say that amongst the modern day Nizari this has extended to "grandsons" too as the previous Aga Khan skipped his son and picked instead his grandson (the current Karim Aga Khan) as his successor. Interestingly, this was not known till the will of the Aga Khan III was read.

The succession of Imams has often been very complex. Partly the issue is that after Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and the Ismaili/Isthnaashari schism, the three Imams after Imam Muhammad bin Ismail went into seclusion. Details on the life of the "mastureen" are not known. Actually, even in the case of the Fatmid Caliph-Imams we do not know the precise number of children each had.

In any case, there is no need for the eldest son to succeed. Amusingly, in the biography of Ustad Juzer one finds that often the Imam had a very low opinions of his cousins or his close relatives, calling them fools, donkeys and other choice words. Apparently, idiotic and corrupt shehzads have always existed!

Imam Hassan was accepted by both Shia and Sunni as khalifa. Yet Shia history prioritises only Huseins martyrdom and his descendents. Imam Hussain was not a Khalifa as by Sunni books. This raises questions someone has selectively created the ideology.

The schism within Shia has been regular.

There are history article the Fatimid demise was due to corruption, arrogance, mid governance. Al Hakim triggered the crusades by provoking and attacking Jerusalem

The Ismaili author s appropriately ignore the genocide, murders, oppression people of the empire suffered under their rule. If I paste it some one will say this is enemy propoganda.

Imam Hassan was accepted by both Shia and Sunni as khalifa. Yet Shia history prioritises only Huseins martyrdom and his descendents. Imam Hussain was not a Khalifa as by Sunni books. This raises questions someone has selectively created the ideology.

The schism within Shia has been regular.

There are history article the Fatimid demise was due to corruption, arrogance, mid governance. Al Hakim triggered the crusades by provoking and attacking Jerusalem

The Ismaili author s appropriately ignore the genocide, murders, oppression people of the empire suffered under their rule. If I paste it some one will say this is enemy propoganda.

Ismaili Origins
Before analyzing the Fatimids as a political force, we must first understand their religious stance. From the time of Ali (ra), Muslims had been divided politically on which family should hold the office of the caliphate. Those that believed the family of Ali should always be the political leaders of the Muslim world became known as Shi’at Ali (the partisans of Ali). Over time, however, what was once a political difference of opinion became a religious one. The descendants of Ali became known as Imams and were seen not only as political leaders, but spiritual and religious leaders as well.

One group of Shi’a became known as the Ismailis, because they broke off in accepting Ismail ibn Jafar as the seventh Imam, while the majority of Shias accepted Musa ibn Jafar (for this reason, the Ismailis are also referred to as the Sevener branch of Shi’ism). After this split with the majority of Shi’as, the Ismailis began to develop unique and unorthodox beliefs. It is interesting to note that Ismail who was accepted by Ismailis, had actually died during the life of Imam Jafar as Sadiq. Still, the Ismailis accept Ismail as their seventh Imam. (More details in article Disconnected Ismaili History: Imam Ismail Died Years Before His Father Died)

One of the main Ismaili tenants is the belief in the batin, or “hidden”, meaning of the Quran. They insist that each verse of the Quran has an apparent, literal meaning, and a hidden meaning that only the Ismaili Imam (present day Aga Khan) is qualified to interpret. Using this, the Ismailis, through their imams, have come up with very different and heretical beliefs that are in direct contradiction of mainstream Islam. For example, the imams are seen as infallible, perfect humans that are incapable of making mistakes. Over time, their imams have claimed divine attributes and abilities. (Read more “Ismailis Worship Me” – Aga Khan III). These Ismaili imams are seen as incarnations of God himself, and as “suspended between man and heaven”.

Clearly, the Ismaili view of Islam is one that is unorthodox and contrary to the basic Islamic concepts of tawhid – Oneness of God. For this reason, the recent Amman Message that brought together Muslim scholars from all branches, schools of thought, and sects (including the current Ismaili imam), recognized 7 schools of thought within Islam, and Ismailism was not one of them. The Aga Khan however lied openly through a written letter that Ismailis adhere to the Jafari (Shia) school of thought (read Decoding The Amman Message to view a copy of the letter signed by the Aga Khan). The Twelver Shia, openly reject Aga Khani Ismailis as disbelievers (read Why are Ismailis not Shia?)

For this reason, the Fatimid Empire, which adhered to Ismaili beliefs cannot truly considered a Muslim empire, nor can their actions be considered as representative of Muslims. A more accurate way of understanding them is to know their beliefs fall outside the realm of Islam, and to recognize them as a separate faith altogether, just like the Ahmadiyya are recognized as a separate religion outside of Islam.

2. Rise of the Fatimids
Due to the natural Muslim disapproval of the extremist Ismailis, they had to go “underground” in the 800s and early 900s to survive as a religion. They hid their beliefs, but appointed numerous preachers to travel the Muslim world and preach Ismaili ideas to lay people. This effort established numerous secretive Ismaili “cells” across the Muslim world from Morocco to India. In 909, one of these cells decided it was ready to go public and begin its quest for domination of the Muslim world.

A man named Abdullah al-Mahdi Billah declared himself caliph and the Mahdi (the Awaited One) in 909 in present-day Tunisia. He adhered to Ismaili beliefs and claimed to be an Ismaili Imam, related to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) through his daughter Fatima (thus the name Fatimids), although his ancestral claims were probably forged as no contemporary account verifies them. Al-Mahdi Billah hoped to increase his own power by using the Berbers of North Africa as his supporters and armed forces. He played on Berber discontent with the ruling Aghlabid Empire of North Africa. He promised to give them prominence in return for their conversion to Ismailism and support of his leadership.

His plan worked. Numerous Berber tribes, including the Kutama and Sanhaja, joined a confederacy supporting al-Mahdi Billah, and he extended his domain across North Africa. Modern Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Sicily, Malta, and Libya fell under Fatimid control in the mid 900s. The Fatimid Empire at its peak in the late 900s included North Africa, Syria, and the Hejaz.

The Fatimid "caliphate" at it's peak included some North African territories with Hejaz. (Courtesy: GlobalSecurity.org)
The Fatimid “caliphate” at it’s peak included some North African territories with Hejaz. (Courtesy: GlobalSecurity.org)

The rise of this Ismaili Fatimid state served as a reign of terror for Muslims in their domain. Contemporary chroniclers note that Fatimid rulers were more atheistic than anything in their beliefs and that “devout believers were unable to attend the mosques on Friday lest they be obliged to listen to prayers for impious tyrants.” The legends of religious tolerance and unity among people under the Fatimids is thus clearly seen as a myth. However, things would take a turn for the worse when the Fatimids conquered Egypt.

3. Fatimid Rule in Egypt
In 969, the Fatimids were powerful enough to conquer Egypt from the Ikhshidid Dynasty (الإخشيديون‎‎). They rode into Egypt and beyond, conquering Syria and the Hejaz, bringing all three holy cities: Makkah, Madinah, and Jerusalem under their control. They established the city of Cairo as a palace city for the Fatimid emperor, keeping him away from the local population, which was mostly centered in nearby Fustat (الفسطاط‎‎). This was the maximum point of Fatimid power. The late 900s saw the Fatimid realm encompass a majority of the Muslim world extending from Morocco to Syria. This is the time that Orientalist scholars refer to as the golden age of the Fatimids and their era of great religious tolerance.

Here is where the myth of Fatimid religious toleration must be analyzed in full. Orientalist scholars make the claim that the Fatimid era saw the flourishing of Christian and Jewish communities. However, religious tolerance was not uncommon in the Muslim world. From the earliest Muslim conquests to the later Ottoman Empire, religious freedoms have always been guaranteed according to Islamic law. A common claim of religious tolerance is that Fatimids appointed Christians, Jews, and others to high governmental posts. Again, this is not unique. The Umayyads, Abbasids, and others also appointed non-Muslims to government posts. For example, the Fatimids’ contemporaries in the east, the Abbasids, were very adamant about bringing all faiths to Baghdad (including pagan Greek scientists and animist Turkish generals) to create a golden age of Islamic civilization. That the Fatimids also guaranteed religious freedoms for minorities certainly did not make them unique, as they simply followed the examples of earlier empires.

From an Islamic perspective, Fatimid rule meant anything but religious tolerance. Ismailism was the state religion and was heavily propagated by the government. Congregational prayer in the traditional Muslim way was banned, and Friday prayers were performed in the name of the Fatimid “caliph”. In a further insult to traditional Muslims, only Ismailis were allowed to enter the holy city of Jerusalem. Ismaili pilgrims were encouraged to travel there, but Sunnis were banned from passing through its walls. (Montefiore, Simon Sebag. Jerusalem: The Biography, 204. New York: Random House Inc., 2011. Print.)

The Fatimids’ coreligionists, the Qarmatians in the Arabian Peninsula, were also Ismaili and continued the harassment and attacks on Muslims, in cooperation with the Fatimids. In 906 they ambushed a caravan of pilgrims heading for Makkah and killed 20,000 people. In 928, they sacked Makkah, massacred its population, and stole the Black Stone off the wall of the Ka’bah. It was returned 22 years later after a ransom was paid. (Saunders, JJ. A History of Medieval Islam, 130. London: Routledge, 1965. Print.)

Overall, persecution of Muslims was rampant in Fatimid times. State policies demanding acceptance of Ismaili beliefs were oppressive to Muslims and strongly rejected. The Fatimid response to this was horribly severe, as “thousands of devout Muslims were killed during the [Fatimid] dynasty simply because they reused to disgrace the Companions of the Prophet (pbuh)”. (Najeebabadi, Akbar Shah. The History of Islam. Riyadh: Darussalam, 2001. 269. Print.)

The “mad caliph” al-Hakim bi Amr Allah as noted by a vast majority of historians.

Religious persecution was not limited to Muslims, however. Although at times Christians and Jews were given rights and freedoms, during the reign of al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah (r. 996-1021), all non-Ismailis were persecuted. Known as the “mad caliph” (al-Khateeb, 2014) because of his eccentricities and oppression, he showed complete intolerance for others. In 1009, he ordered that the historic and religiously significant Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem be demolished brick by brick. All other churches and synagogues in Jerusalem were either destroyed or closed, and Christians and Jews feigned conversion to Ismailism to avoid persecution (Montefiore, Simon Sebag. Jerusalem: The Biography, 208. New York: Random House Inc. , 2011. Print.). His actions were one of the reasons for the Crusades, which erupted 90 years later. It is important to note again that the Ismaili actions at this point cannot be considered as Muslim actions. Islamic law has no room for such treatment of Jews and Christians, and al-Hakim’s actions represent only himself and Ismaili beliefs, as he was the Imam of Ismailism.

4. Decline and Legacy
The Fatimid Empire lasted until the late 1100s. It weakened considerably through the 1000s and 1100s, with internal revolts by Sunnis and the Crusades severely hampering its power. The lights went out for the Fatimids in 1171, when Salah al-Din, officially abolished the empire and “caliphate”, reuniting Egypt with the Sunni world, much to the happiness of the Egyptians.

Despite their chaotic and turbulent 200+ years in power, the Fatimids did not leave much of an intellectual legacy. Ismailism went underground again, this time in the form of terror cells spread throughout the Muslim world, commonly known as the Assassins. Indeed, even during the height of the Fatimids, very few people willingly converted to Ismailism. Most of the population remained Sunni, even under very stringent oppression. Al-Azhar University was founded by the Fatimids in Cairo in an attempt to convert the locals, but it failed miserably in this endeavor and it was converted into a mainstream Muslim university by Salah al-Din, which was when it became known as a center for learning.

5. Conclusion
In conclusion, the Fatimids can be seen as an invading, oppressive religious force in the medieval Muslim world. They cannot be fully counted as Muslims, as their actions and beliefs directly contradicted mainstream Islam. The myths of their religious tolerance as supported by Orientalist and apologetic scholars are clearly false, as has been stated and referenced. It is important to understand the different perspectives and not simply accept one line of thinking without evidence.

Thanks again Bohra Spring. It is an interesting read, and I see that in the 2nd post you reference that the Aga Khan is making the case that he should be included. That is a discussion for another day. My personal sense is that anybody who says that they are Muslims and consider themselves muslims should be included as muslims - but then what do I know.

But something else caught my eyes, and I want to bring it up. The Amman messages definition of who constitutes a Muslim definately excludes Islamilis and Bohras. Please look at this link and their defination:
---------------------------
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

May peace and blessings be upon the Prophet Muhammad and his pure and noble family

(1) Whosoever is an adherent to one of the four Sunni schools (Mathahib) of Islamic jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi`i and Hanbali), the two Shi’i schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Ja`fari and Zaydi), the Ibadi school of Islamic jurisprudence and the Thahiri school of Islamic jurisprudence, is a Muslim. Declaring that person an apostate is impossible and impermissible. Verily his (or her) blood, honour, and property are inviolable. Moreover, in accordance with the Shaykh Al-Azhar’s fatwa, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare whosoever subscribes to the Ash`ari creed or whoever practices real Tasawwuf (Sufism) an apostate. Likewise, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare whosoever subscribes to true Salafi thought an apostate.
Equally, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims who believes in God, Glorified and Exalted be He, and His Messenger (may peace and blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and acknowledges the five pillars of Islam, and does not deny any necessarily self-evident tenet of religion.
-------------------http://ammanmessage.com/the-three-point ... ssage-v-1/
-----------------------------
Ismailis are not included, and does that mean Bohras are not included, or, do we fall under the category highlighted above?

Now the observation: For a message that possibly does not even include us, and definitely does not include us explicitly, why did the 2 sons of MS (Taha Bhaisaheb and Jafar-us-Sadiq bhai saheb) sign that message? I mean, you are signing a message (essentially saying I agree), to a message that possibly does NOT even consider us as Muslims?

I was refraining from commenting on the anti-Ismaili and anti-Bohra rants that so-called "Bohra" Spring has posted. (Not his writings but some garbage he found online). However, seems like a couple of comments are in order.

First, the history of Fatimid empire and the philosophical underpinnings of Ismailism was originally written by their enemies. This has started to change recently. Hence, these sources are highly biased and can not be used to judge the Fatimid empire and the status of the Imams and, later, the da'is. With a simple search one can find many anti-Muslim and anti-Prophet articles on the internet also. Does not make them true and does not mean we, like fools, just believe them and start hating Muslims and the Prophet. Use your brains and do not trust your enemies to tell the truth about you.

Second, the Prophet has defined what makes a Muslim: someone who recites the kalimaa with sincerity. (There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his Prophet). That is all. At the time of the Prophet there were no "schools" of fiqh. Hence, are we to conclude that those early sahaaba were not Muslim?! Who cares what some groups of pompous, fatuous mullahs say? Who cares about "Amman message"? There is a trust between you and Allah, and only you, are responsible for it. Don't seek mullhas or approvals from self-appointed fools.

As to why Muffy's kids would sign such a documents. Who knows and who cares? Muffy is a politician, first and foremost. He will do anything that brings him praise or recognition. Even his father (and partly his grandfather) was the same. These people are after money, fame and power. They probably got invited to this and so thoughtlessly signed it. It is a meaningless gesture.

I can understand your sentiments, it is painful for many who have been brought up for generations to have their faith regarded as a sham. Bohra identity everything that was the source of ideology is discredited. I was born Bohra but ideologically left the belief system. I am not an outsider.

Have you ever stepped on then other side to see why we have scrubbed the history to make us feel good and loyal.

Regarding Aman , our princes who with their inflated ego that we admire is completely worthless against the majority Islamic scholars. They can fool us as a small community but are completely outsmarted outside. Really these defenders of your faith would either completely timid or more concerned with their name on the list of invited vs standing up for their faith.

I met a prince a few years ago and I discussed why we don't publish our literature, he mentioned we would be wiped out, they are so dangerous our mythology. That now rings a bell Bohras are very much deviants. Our history has been glossed over. I can now understand why Abdallah Yusuf Ali lost belief in Bohra once he understood the Quran.

Your view about being classified as non Muslims, you do deeply agree one we do shirk , equate partners like Imams , Diai and imam Ali AS to Allah we immediately become non Muslims even if we recite the Kalama over and over again. Let us be sincere we don't have 5 pillars we even polluted that by making 7.bohras have tried to be different at every way. Our 23 Hazisalat, have you ever thought how wierd is to bow to Allah but turn a cheek instead. What silliness and paganism is that. The belief in Imam Zaman communication with Diai. I can go on but those who are smart will know by now. Yet you want to be called Muslims?

I can send more articles, list of European historians who claim Fatimid downfall was because like any empire had lost it ways. Infact if you consider India, British filled India longer than Fatimid were in power.

Give me your source of independent historians who can wouch for Ismaili tradition s being sincere other than a Guerilla warfare.

Another place admit in public Bohra faith is insignificant. Darpok brats. I have strong suspicion they went for selfies, look at gorgeous Jordanian women and food. I don't think they comprehend what the meeting was all about. They love being called intellectual Princes. How dumb.

I was refraining from commenting on the anti-Ismaili and anti-Bohra rants that so-called "Bohra" Spring has posted. (Not his writings but some garbage he found online).

Mee to. All these resources provided by Bhora Spring are just garbage for me. Anyone can write whatever they want. This person nicknamed "Bohra" Spring can believe whatever he wants. I think any person with any education of Ismailism will disagree with this "Bohra" Spring person. Allah is the final and true judge.